Re: Rand and IRAQ

From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Sat Jun 14 2003 - 00:37:04 MDT

  • Next message: Paul Grant: "RE: How best to spend US$200 billion? RE: `twisted ethics prevalent onthe extropy board'"

    On Friday 13 June 2003 21:01, Damien Broderick wrote:
    > At 08:30 PM 6/13/03 -0400, Michael Dickey wrote:
    > >I feel Rand makes compelling arguments for an
    > >objective basis for ethics, but I admit I am not yet intelligent enough to
    > >fully defend or even comprehend them.
    >
    > Ahem. Well, I have been wondering about this (idly, you understand), since
    > I assumed that you'd be a fan of Randian ethics. As I recall, John Galt and
    > all the other supermen of reason abandoned the suffering people of the
    > world and beat their retreat to a high mountaintop, leaving the world to
    > crash and burn under the malign hands of losers, freeloaders, collectivists
    > and unattractive people with names along the lines of Sneaky Weems. Would
    > John Galt have supported a state invasion of Iraq? Would he have supported
    > an invasion of collectivized USA, for that matter? Not as I read it.
    >

    Inaccurate. They realized that the system as it was would never ever help
    "the suffering people of the world" and would make it impossible for them to
    do any real good. So they redrew that it might collapse under its own weight
    quickly. This arguably gave less net suffering and cleared the ground for
    something different faster than other possible courses of action.

    You are correct that no decent objectivist would support the invasion of Iraq
    imho. But that is a good thing. Most objectivist believe that real change
    will only come from change minds. I am not so sure that is a good thing.

    But the original seems to be about whether there is an objective basis for
    ethics. So I seem to be missing context that gave your reply meaning in
    seeming response to that.

    - samantha



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 14 2003 - 00:44:50 MDT